The Court's previous Order to Show Cause re Subject Matter Jurisdiction was sent in error. The Court has reviewed the complaint and is not convinced that the amount in controversy in this case exceeds $75,000. In a standard class action, for diversity jurisdiction to exist, at least one named plaintiff must claim to be entitled to relief that exceeds $75,000. See Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Allapattah Servs., Inc., 125 S. Ct. 2611, 2615 (2005). It is facially unlikely that the named plaintiff is entitled to relief in excess of $75,000 related to the retail purchase of fraudulent water. Therefore, Plaintiff is ordered to show cause, in writing, by December 20, 2011, why the case should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

The ex parte application for alternative service is DENIED without prejudice given the Court's apparent lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

Our website includes the main text of the court's opinion but does not include the
docket number, case citation or footnotes. Upon purchase, docket numbers and/or
citations allow you to research a case further or to use a case in a legal proceeding.
Footnotes (if any) include details of the court's decision.

Buy This Entire Record For
$7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.